What rights do Artistic 2.0 licence gives to the Author?

Question

I am not sure that this license grants the Author the right of referencing its name in future modifications of Open-Source code. Does this license grant the Licensee the right to sell the modified source code without author's permission?

How can I interpret this: Any use, modification, and distribution of the Standard or Modified Versions is governed by this Artistic License. By using, modifying or distributing the Package, you accept this license. Do not use, modify, or distribute the Package, if you do not accept this license.

(11) If your Modified Version has been derived from a Modified Version made by someone other than you, you are nevertheless required to ensure that your Modified Version complies with the requirements of this license.

(12) This license does not grant you the right to use any trademark, service mark, tradename, or logo of the Copyright Holder.

(13) This license includes the non-exclusive, worldwide, free-of-charge patent license to make, have made, use, offer to sell, sell, import and otherwise transfer the Package with respect to any patent claims licensable by the Copyright Holder that are necessarily infringed by the Package. If you institute patent litigation (including a cross-claim or counterclaim) against any party alleging that the Package constitutes direct or contributory patent infringement, then this Artistic License to you shall terminate on the date that such litigation is filed.

Answer 1

Do this license grant the Licensee the right to sell the modificated source code without author permittion?

The Artistic License allows, in s4, that

You may Distribute your Modified Version as Source (either gratis or for a Distributor Fee, and with or without a Compiled form of the Modified Version) provided that you clearly document how it differs from the Standard Version, including, but not limited to, documenting any non-standard features, executables, or modules, and provided that you do at least ONE of the following:

(a) make the Modified Version available to the Copyright Holder of the Standard Version, under the Original License, so that the Copyright Holder may include your modifications in the Standard Version.

(b) ensure that installation of your Modified Version does not prevent the user installing or running the Standard Version. In addition, the Modified Version must bear a name that is different from the name of the Standard Version.

(c) allow anyone who receives a copy of the Modified Version to make the Source form of the Modified Version available to others under

(i) the Original License or

(ii) a license that permits the licensee to freely copy, modify and redistribute the Modified Version using the same licensing terms that apply to the copy that the licensee received

and in s6 allows that

You may Distribute a Modified Version in Compiled form without the Source, provided that you comply with Section 4 with respect to the Source of the Modified Version.

So yes, you may sell your modified version, as source or binary, without reference to the original rightsholder, provided that you follow those requirements.

I am not sure that this license grants the Author the right of referencing its name in future modifications of Open-Source code.

If by "author" you mean "original rightsholder", (s)he is not bound by the terms of his/her own licence grant, so (s)he is still free to use that name as (s)he sees fit. Others distributing modified versions must change the name, as per Artistic Licence s4b.